Political Compass

[Yupa]

holy crap, nice graphic suse. Is it possible to make one with only thoses who answered the quiz?

done

[Bacchus]

i win!

[Dav]

GJ suse

 

Bacchus, your score is most negitive which makes you last

[MasterDrake]

I'm surprised... I was expecting drake to be a little more radical, and conservative. I also thought you'd be a centrist, bacchus

My views are more of morals and what I think is right to a certain extent. I can except somethings but I think others are just down right wrong sometimes. I think I will post a little post here soon a bout the US

[Manus Celer Dei]

you need a browser that doesn't suck to view this

I'm connected on a university network and all I can use are browsers that suck!

[Samapico]

Your political comp!@#$%^&*

Economic Left/Right: -7.38

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.28

 

 

GG Ghandi!!

[Bacchus]

I also thought you'd be a centrist, bacchus

 

Some of my friends accused me of being centrist, but i found out recently that i was profoundly bothered by everything traditionnal: family values, religion, traditionnal values and all that crap...so i drifted to...mmmh... i guess it could be anarchy but then again i'm too lazy to be an anarch

[MonteZuma]

Another quiz:

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz.html

In this I'm still left of centre (liberal) but I'm less libertarian (anarchaic). The diagram is upside down compared to the compass

 

Your Personal issues Score is 60%.

Your Economic issues Score is 20%.

 

Left-Liberal

Left-Liberals generally embrace freedom of choice in personal matters, but support central decision-making in economics. They want the government to help the disadvantaged in the name of fairness. Liberals tend to tolerate social diversity, but work for what they might describe as "economic equality."

[A Soldier]

I find the political comp!@#$%^&* more accurate than this one.

 

Left Liberal too

Your Personal issues Score is %.

Your Economic issues Score is 40%.

[Aileron]

Bacchus, I think you are right around where Karl Marx would be.

 

That's the same quiz I took last time.

 

Personal Issues: 60%

Economic Issues: 70%

 

 

I'm considered a centrist on this site, although I am on the Libertarian-Centrist border.

 

Centrist

Centrists favor selective government intervention and emphasize what they commonly describe as "practical solutions" to current problems. They tend to keep an open mind on political issues. Many centrists feel that government serves as a check on excessive liberty.

[Slowking Man]

Your Personal issues Score is 50%.

Your Economic issues Score is %.

 

Centrist, but on the conservative/libertarian corner.

[MasterDrake]

lmao

Statist

Statists want government to have a great deal of control over individuals and society. They support centralized planning, and often doubt whether liberty and freedom of choice are practical options. At the very bottom of the chart, left-authoritarians are usually called socialists, while right-authoritarians are generally called fascists.

 

Your Personal issues Score is 30%.

Your Economic issues Score is 20%.

[Zetirix]

Economic Left/Right: -4.38

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.49

 

Ghadi baby.

 

And...

 

Your Personal issues Score is 60%.

Your Economic issues Score is 50%.

 

- Z

[Aileron]

Being like Ghandi is only good if you happen to live in India in the early 1900's

[Yupa]

Being like Ghandi is only good if you happen to live in India in the early 1900's

you wish you were as cool as Gandhi

[»i88gerbils]

If you're oldbie enough you might be interested in what score I recieved. I had particular problems answering many of the questions because while I technically agreed with a statement I was sure that the script would take my answer the wrong way.

 

Economic Left/Right: -3.25

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.74

 

More discussion on the individual questions themselves and why I disagree with their method will be carried out later. For now OCL. Many of the questions carry a bias and many do not carry choices that reflect my personal belief rather then rational answers.

[Dav]

accurate, im in a similar position on that quis as i was on the outer one.

 

Your Personal issues Score is 60%.

Your Economic issues Score is 20%.

[A Soldier]

From PC's FAQ:

 

Some of the questions are slanted

 

Most of them are slanted ! Some right-wingers accuse us of a leftward slant. Some left-wingers accuse us of a rightward slant. But it's important to realise that this isn't a survey, and these aren't questions. They're propositions - an altogether different proposition. To question the logic of individual ones that irritate you is to miss the point. Some propositions are extreme, and some are more moderate. That's how we can show you whether you lean towards extremism or moderation on the compass

 

Some of the propositions are intentionally vague. Their purpose is to trigger buzzwords in the mind of the user, measuring feelings and prejudices rather than detailed opinions on policy.

 

Incidentally, our test is not another internet personality classification tool. The essence of our site is the model for political analysis. The test is simply a demonstration of it.

 

http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/politicalc...&*/faq.html

[»i88gerbils]

Yes, the specific statements are not questions. My mistake. But in order to answer your opinion on a statement a question must be asked. So in that regard they are implied questions. However, if we're going to put it semantically as statements I shall use it so we're not confused.

 

As I said that I would discuss this later I will do so. Each "statement" that I find would misrepresent me with ANY answer I choose shall be discussed in the following. Starting with numero uno. I suggest that we all take the time to provide explanations for our answers because our explanations will provide more insight then the rating system of any poll, survey, or whatever they choose to call this.

 

In college I was introduced to the comp!@#$%^&* at one point, but I only vaguely remember it. I do remember however that I was excited by the four dimensions instead of two. I agree with it, but not with all of these statements. They could have done a much better job creating this. For political analysts of a specific person after the fact it is easy to emulate where they would stand on the chart, but for individual people it is not so simple.

 

"Often people find they wanted to select 'don't know' mainly because they'd never really thought about the idea." They say this in their faq, but that is no excuse for my own beliefs. When I simply cannot choose on some of your statements that means either you should put in some middle ground OR change your statement. This is my main grievance and I will explain why in the next section.

 

------

 

Additionally, the following has nothing to do with "slants", but to whether or not I have the potential to actually ANSWER their statements with the answers provided. When I use the term bias I mean inability or confusion in the statement that would render my response incorrect to my actual position.

 

"If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations."

 

This statement has a several flaws that I find that made me want to skip the statement entirely. Yes, I could not say I agreed or disagreed with it. But already this "political comp!@#$%^&*" is flawed by refusing to let me leave a statement blank. The reasons I did not want to answer this statement was that I felt "humanity" was not defined. An answer of "strongly agree", "argee", "disagree", or "strongly disagree" did not fit my character because I do not believe globalization should be for any specific purpose. Where does that answer fit on the "comp!@#$%^&*"?

 

"I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong."

 

This one I could answer, and I "strongly agree". Why? After reading Andrew Macintyre you might agree too. However, in various discussions through the SubSpace community many found me "not supportive" of "my" country taking the time to slander me in the process. So, here the statement can reveal two different characteristics. Since they refuse to release their details we can only assume that they are not treating this statement with any weight (or so I hope).

 

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

 

Again, I can neither agree or disagree. When considering friendship I consider the traits of the person. That person could be the enemy of my enemy, or a friend of my enemy. I have had both, and still consider them friends. Again, where do I fit on the comp!@#$%^&* since I cannot answer the statement?

 

"It's a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking water is now a bottled, branded consumer product."

 

Now here they are trying to take something specific and apply it to the general. Not necessarily a bad thing. I enjoy bottled water and tap water (ah good ol' Northern California tap water). I do not agree that bottling water is a sad reflection on our society however there are other things like health care that I do not think should be a "bottled, branded consumer product" (which it is in the U.S.). Now 2003 was the year of fresh water, and we learned (or hopefully learned) that fresh drinking water is a precious and rare resource in many third-world countries. Now since I did not agree with the statement does that mean I do not agree that we should improve free drinking water? Of course not, I love a water fountain just as anyone else does. So then again, I cannot answer this statement without betraying myself.

 

"A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system."

 

True. This is a fact. There is no denying it. Whether I agree that as political en!@#$%^&*ies of a state we should have only one party is a different matter. Contrarily I believe in healthy discussion that promotes compromise or agreements. However, the statement requests my agreement if it is a "significant advantage" and it is. I have to agree. It is true. This statement is improperly worded because whether it is a fact or not has nothing to do with my political situation (the argument would pertain to whether China is making "progress" or not).

 

"Multinational companies are unethically exploiting the plant genetic resources of developing countries."

 

!@#$%^&*umption: all multi-national companies are unethically exploiting (or not) the plant genetic resources of developing countries. There have been definite cases of both. Whether this has to do with some companies fearing goverment intervention or not is another statement. A potential alternative using their wording from other statements: Should there be stronger regulation for multinational plant genetic resource companies in developing countries.

 

"Religion and morality are closely linked."

 

Yes. This is also a fact. There is no denying it. However, the correct statement to "pose" (hah, I had to prevent myself from saying "ask" here) would have been: Morality should be closely linked with religion. Morality is subjective. And although the dictionary definition defines morality as coming from a community I disagree. It can come from a living situation, a religion, a business, or from yourself. I think I proved this in countless discussions years ago within this very community. That there is not one morality for SubSpace. Interestingly I understand that moralities can be subsets of each other.

 

So to continue with this statement. Do I agree that religion and morality are closely linked? Yes and no. I believe that religion can create a morality, but I disagree that there is one morality for the U.S. (and this comp!@#$%^&* is U.S. centered based on the statements). So again, how do I answer this statement? I cannot. I agree and I disagree. I cannot answer with any of the answers provided.

 

"It's fine for society to be open about sex, but these days it's going too far."

 

This is not a poorly constructed statement. The problem is with me. I have problems defining "going too far". It goes too far on television in my opinion, but in schools, sex issues should be discussed. I did condom races back in high school, and I agree that they did help me even if some people I talked about it to found it "crude". This is not a quip about the compass but a minor annoyance at myself for not being able to find an answer.

 

----------

 

Okay so let's review. I scored a -3.25 on the economic side, which places me to the left slightly. This is fairly accurate since I am conservative on some issues with some of the statements on the "comp!@#$%^&*". I scored a -1.74 on the Y axis, which places me as more libertarian. One might automatically say that this fits me like a glove since I did vote for Harry Browne in the last election, but the reasons for my voting were selfish and authoritative.

 

Continuing on this thread, during the last presidential election I took it upon myself to review all the candidates platforms. This was something I was unable to do for the recent California Recall election and I am not proud of that, but I am happy about my decision to go with Arnold (sooo many candidates >.<). I found that I could not agree with issues that I found important. Even more important was that issues that I thought one way most of the major parties agreed on. So with that in mind I voted to have an administration that would not -*BAD WORD*- with what I didn't want -*BAD WORD*-ed with the wrong way. In this reasoning, I put my own thoughts on this country ahead of focusing on the majority.

 

However, going straight by the issues off of one poll recently, I agreed more with Green issues. Though I still would not vote for Nader or the Green candidate specifically because of their complete non-involvement with past foreign reconstruction -*BAD WORD*- ups (*cough* Iraq *cough* Afghanistan). So where do I fit? I fit in the decision that I made years ago: to be an independent.

 

I take specific issues one step at a time. I try to stay informed, though I know that I do not have the time to keep up to date (and many times am too lazy to do so).

 

So the next question is if I am so "independent" why did I score -1 points towards being an anarch rather then authoritative. I already said it was my way or the highway. My liberal views of human rights could be construed as libertarian though.

 

The comp!@#$%^&* also places me in the region of individuals that are concerned with humanity as a whole. My strong sense of individuality merges with my concern for human rights much of which ARE based on people like Ghandi (also my continual internal debate about whether there is such a thing as inalienable). Perhaps I did not answer "strongly agree" when I should have? Or perhaps the statements given were NOT enough to push me to my authoritative side?

 

So in conclusion I am relatively happy about my placement on the compass but I am disappointed at some statements that could not capture a more complete picture. And I maintain that the site does not define your political standing, but after reflection on taking the "comp!@#$%^&*" you can question its decision based on statements it did not pose. As you read about me you discovered that I had many sides that could not accurately answer the statements the "comp!@#$%^&*" posed, and it is this point that I stress. The statements do not accurately portray the political compass They could if they changed the statements OR the answers. Perhaps even changing the available answers for each statement would work?

 

 

N.B.: Oh, I did read the FAQ. But I thought I'd like to share with you what I thought about it anyway. The FAQ did not answer my questions anyway since the questions I bring up are not frequent (since hey, I'm an independent!). It did help provide some insight and remind me of a couple of other things though.

 

 

Disclaimer:

There is no need to quote all of a paragraph when responding. If you do, you're a -*BAD WORD*-ing re-*BAD WORD*- who doesn't know how to organize thoughts properly in a discussion.

 

if you have read all this you have learned a great deal about me. if you have read all this and don't care, you're a moron who shouldn't have read it and shouldn't reply to it.

[Yupa]

I didn't read that, i88g - I'm assume it's at least as good as what I'd say if I was bored/motivated enough to post about it, so....kudos

[Yupa]

[you need a browser that doesn't suck to view this]

 

Last Updated: 30/07/2004 1121 UTC

 

 

With: Composers | Politicals | Primaries | only ssforum

 

 

[A Soldier]

nice post i88